Newt Gingrich: I love life

posted at 5:00 pm on March 17, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Newt Gingrich was feeling particularly good a couple days ago, delivering a quote that seems perfect to publicize on a Saturday afternoon. In Barrington, Ill., this week, a reporter asked the former Speaker of the House to defend the assertion he made in a debate that he is “cheerful.” Here’s what Gingrich had to say:

“I love life. I love getting up in the morning. I love seeing what the weather is going to be. I love animals. I love the process of interacting with people. I like learning. So I really am basically cheerful everyday because in my mind everyday is cool; I am still here.”

Pretty neat, huh? After all the mistakes he’s made, the stressful life he’s lived, the political career he’s had, he’s able to say this. Perhaps it’s this kind of positivity that explains why he was able to stage two comebacks in this election cycle and why he persists when no path to victory is apparent.

The whole political game often gets me down. Victories always seem outnumbered by defeats, chivalrous moments always seem outnumbered by scandals, eloquent statements always seem outnumbered by gaffes. But what someone with Newt Gingrich’s life experience knows to an extent that no young gun can fully grasp is this: Life goes on — and some things are actually bigger than politics. The sun will still shine, the rain and snow will still fall, the wind will still blow. Animals will still be animals, blissfully unaware — and there will always be something new to learn.

In the end, what drives me nuts about Newt Gingrich is also what I like best about him: He just seems so human, fabulously flawed, inexhaustibly searching, openly vulnerable. While I’d rather have as president someone who has more closely hewn to the straight and narrow in both his politics and his personal life, I’m ultimately glad Newt Gingrich has been in the race. Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum remind me that it’s possible to live privately what you espouse publicly and inspire me to strive to match their examples of personal integrity. Gingrich reminds me that life is for all of us, both those who’ve got it together and those who don’t. When I think about it that way, I love life, too.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Oh noes, I pyped “your” instead of you are…grammer Danish is gonna get me…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Nice article for St. Patrick’s Day !!!

TimLenox on March 17, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Pretty neat, huh? After all the mistakes he’s made, the stressful life he’s lived, the political career he’s had, he’s able to say this.

I’m sorry, but this is what HotAir has become? We’re doing Deepak Chopra now? It’s “neat” that a lifelong, gasbag, sucking-at-the-teat-of-government-largesse-for-30-years, adulterous politician professes that he is “happy.” I’m looking for the parody in this post, but I am just not finding it. I’m having a God-awful feeling that this post is serious.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Been a good enough version to earn him the support of most Republican voters.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 6:23 PM

It’s not even “most”. Listen, I’m not particularly averse to Romney unlike many others. It’s just that the nature of the support is so tepid, and it’s bought with SO MUCH money, and there doesn’t seem to be any natural attraction to the man himself, it’s more to his past business successes. He is a vulnerable politician, really more vulnerable. Those who think that Rick’s crazy “christian ayatollah” stuff makes him more vulnerable get the equation all wrong in my opinion.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Oh noes, I pyped “your” instead of you are…grammer Danish is gonna get me

*Shite…I need more whiskey…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Igor is NOT a low life.

Schadenfreude on March 17, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Then maybe he shouldn’t act like one…bitter comments of his kind are not constructive, nor condussive to respectful discussion. And sorry, if my spellcheck doesnt work…*Danish…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:30 PM

“Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future” Oscar Wilde
This quote fits Newt’s life journey.

evergreenland on March 17, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Other than he is no saint and has not future, it describes him perfectly.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Funny, you must have missed the parady in your comment…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:31 PM

He would probably endorse Newt, but that’s a rather far-fetched scenario with no factual basis, and at the moment, in my opinion, Newt is hurting Rick and in effect helping his arch-nemesis.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:22 PM

See, I don’t think he would endorse Newt. Having lived in PA and watched Rick over the years, knowing he is a “team player”, I believe that he would go for the establishment pick to position himself for a Washington job. It may be far-fetched at this point, but it makes me think about what he will do to get along if he makes it. If he does become the nominee, I will vote for him. I can’t say the same about Romney at this point.

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Then maybe he shouldn’t act like one…bitter comments of his kind are not constructive, nor condussive to respectful discussion. And sorry, if my spellcheck doesnt work…*Danish…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:30 PM

I see, you are evidently not a fan of incendiary language. Let’s all love each other, give each other hugs and kisses, and maybe, just maybe, that will result in a better world!

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Those who think that Rick’s crazy “christian ayatollah” stuff makes him more vulnerable get the equation all wrong in my opinion.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Yeah, that worked out so well with Palin…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Funny, you must have missed the parady in your comment…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Nope. Didn’t miss a thing. This is the most inane Gingrich post –possibly the most inane anything post — I have ever read.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Yeah, that worked out so well with Palin…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Palin wasn’t destroyed by that stuff. While she is a great communicator with a certain segment she didn’t communicate well enough with enough people. When you can destroy a politician with ridicule, something is wrong with their fundamental appeal.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

I see, you are evidently not a fan of incendiary language. Let’s all love each other, give each other hugs and kisses, and maybe, just maybe, that will result in a better world!

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Damn…sure, go ahead and disarm me with your smile…what…wait…(*says someone who is TOTALLY innocent of using incendiary language in this forum…evah)

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:35 PM

When you can destroy a politician with ridicule, something is wrong with their fundamental appeal.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

THIS…and St. Rick won’t even know what hit him, when the Axle mach gets going…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:36 PM

See, I don’t think he would endorse Newt. Having lived in PA and watched Rick over the years, knowing he is a “team player”, I believe that he would go for the establishment pick to position himself for a Washington job. It may be far-fetched at this point, but it makes me think about what he will do to get along if he makes it. If he does become the nominee, I will vote for him. I can’t say the same about Romney at this point.

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Rick himself famously (and not helpfully to himself) admitted that he took one for the team, and he had taken many more as you point out. Romney when he closed the door on choosing him as a VP made an error, but it would be hard for Rick to pick him over Newt at this point.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:37 PM

Gingrich is still the only one running besides Ron Paul who can beat Obama.

Nexialist on March 17, 2012 at 6:38 PM

. This is the most inane Gingrich post –possibly the most inane anything post — I have ever read.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Hey, it’s a day for “inaneness”…it’s a fricking day dedicated to green beer for heavens sake…and I am really trying to stay “cheerful” here…heh

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Damn…sure, go ahead and disarm me with your smile…what…wait…(*says someone who is TOTALLY innocent of using incendiary language in this forum…evah)

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Other than calling me a “low-life” of course, but that was surely deserved. Wait, I think I just called you shirley, I apologize.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:39 PM

America can survive A LOT of mismanagement and corruption at the top, it just can’t survive Obama.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:23 PM

If she brings him, again, she deserves him, fully.

Schadenfreude on March 17, 2012 at 6:39 PM

This is the most inane Gingrich post –possibly the most inane anything post — I have ever read.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Don’t let Dr. T see that…it’s out to lunch right now. It got all bent out of shape on the Obama Oil thread when someone said Tina was a lightweight, or sumptin/…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:41 PM

THIS…and St. Rick won’t even know what hit him, when the Axle mach gets going…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:36 PM

Since this is a matter of opinion, and mine has been arrived at after some consideration, let’s just agree to disagree. Let me just say that when Romney is hit with a “flip-flopper” avalanche he won’t likely survive it because it will be true. All you need to do is to play his clips over and over, having two diametrically opposed opinions on everything and that will be it.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:42 PM

If she brings him, again, she deserves him, fully.

Schadenfreude on March 17, 2012 at 6:39 PM

But neither of us do, and many more also don’t. Unfortunately, “America” is not a person.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Oh noes, I pyped “your” instead of you are…grammer Danish is gonna get me…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:26 PM

You must mean Prune. hehe.

SparkPlug on March 17, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Been a good enough version to earn him the support of most Republican voters.
whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 6:23 PM

It’s not even “most”.

2012 Republican Popular Vote

the nature of the support is so tepid

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Even if that were the so, a tepid vote is equal to a wildly enthusiastic one. Also, the other candidates are faring even worse, i.e. “hyper-tepid”. But you’re talking about your feelings here – which is fine – however, the feelings have no impact on the actual figures. The numbers just are what they are.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Other than he is no saint and has not future, it describes him perfectly.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Igor, Santorum will not be nominated , relax and take it easy just like most of us who accepted that our guy will not.
By calling Newt all kinds of names, it just reflects so badly on your candidate, please don’t use Mitt’s supporters tactics they really did hurt him.

evergreenland on March 17, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Even if that were the so, a tepid vote is equal to a wildly enthusiastic one. Also, the other candidates are faring even worse, i.e. “hyper-tepid”. But you’re talking about your feelings here – which is fine – however, the feelings have no impact on the actual figures. The numbers just are what they are.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 6:46 PM

The numbers are such that the anti-Romney vote is about 2/3 at this late stage. It’s not my feelings, I would happily vote for him over Obama. I think he is weak, because he doesn’t know how to connect. He is an awkward person, who manages to turn his wealth into a liability every chance he gets and whose Mormonism is a liability in many parts of the country.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Newt Gingrich: I love life

…But I H8, H8, H8 MITT EFFIN’ ROMNEY!!!!!!!!!

Dude Is Captain Ahab…

-Wasteland Man.

WastelandMan on March 17, 2012 at 6:51 PM

Igor, Santorum will not be nominated , relax and take it easy just like most of us who accepted that our guy will not.
By calling Newt all kinds of names, it just reflects so badly on your candidate, please don’t use Mitt’s supporters tactics they really did hurt him.

evergreenland on March 17, 2012 at 6:49 PM

He is no my candidate per se, I supported two others until they dropped out, and I’ve always called Newt names. I just don’t like Newt, haven’t liked him for years.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Don’t let Dr. T see that…it’s out to lunch right now. It got all bent out of shape on the Obama Oil thread when someone said Tina was a lightweight, or sumptin/…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:41 PM

I’ve enjoyed many posts by Tina, and at times I am genuinely impressed by her grasp of many issues at such a young age. This post isn’t one of those times.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:54 PM

The numbers are such that the anti-Romney vote is about 2/3 at this late stage. It’s not my feelings
Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:50 PM

If it’s not your feelings then you may want to check your math. Run the numbers for the anti-Newt, anti-Santorum, and anti-Paul vote. A person can view numbers through an emotional prism to fit whatever preconceptions s/he may hold. But, in the end, it is as I said; the numbers are not impacted at all.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Wow, you convinced me now…but Mitt then gets up in a 7 star one?

I don’t care, so long as taxpayers don’t have to pay for their stars. I’m not a class divider.

Schadenfreude on March 17, 2012 at 6:08 PM

ya know mitt sucks on Ice, but you get what you pay for. He did not take a salary while running the Salt Lake Olympics, or while governor of Mass.

I wish all our leaders had that kind of attitude, It’s just too bad the rest of him that sucks! :/

-Wasteland Man.

WastelandMan on March 17, 2012 at 7:01 PM

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:41 PM

I’ve enjoyed many posts by Tina, and at times I am genuinely impressed by her grasp of many issues at such a young age. This post isn’t one of those times.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:54 PM

This…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Oh noes, I pyped “your” instead of you are…grammer Danish is gonna get me…
lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Then maybe he shouldn’t act like one…bitter comments of his kind are not constructive, nor condussive to respectful discussion. And sorry, if my spellcheck doesnt work…*Danish…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:30 PM

If I wanted to correct your grammar and spelling you presented many opportunities. It’s your misuse of the word “whine” I objected to. Take heart – you’re not alone! I have complained about this tedious misuse/overuse of the word on more than one occasion…

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 7:09 PM

If it’s not your feelings then you may want to check your math. Run the numbers for the anti-Newt, anti-Santorum, and anti-Paul vote. A person can view numbers through an emotional prism to fit whatever preconceptions s/he may hold. But, in the end, it is as I said; the numbers are not impacted at all.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Well of course the anti-anyone-else numbers are higher. All I’m saying is that the repeated rise of anti-Romneys is indicative of something. He is the “presumptive nominee”, someone who by all rights should be running away with it and yet he is not. I think he is in real trouble.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:09 PM

I urge everyone to go see any/all of the candidates if you are able. I saw Santorum today, and he is nothing like the media caricature. The vid is at C-Span.org.

Lightswitch on March 17, 2012 at 7:11 PM

A ventriloquist was telling Irish jokes on Patrick’s Day when an angry part-Irish Newt stood up shouting, ‘You’re implying we’re all daft and stupid! I ought to punch you in the nose!’

‘I’m sorry, sir, I…’

‘No, not you!’ said Newt, ‘I’m talking to that wee little brat on your knee.’

itsnotaboutme on March 17, 2012 at 5:55 PM

…and that’s how Newt first met Soros and Obama.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Laugh out loud!

itsnotaboutme on March 17, 2012 at 7:11 PM

You mean the integrity that Santorum displayed when he lied about his residency so the taxpayers of PA had to foot the bill for his kids’ cyberschooling, even though his family lived in VA?

Or the way he advocated for limits on malpractice lawsuits – until it came to his wife’s lawsuit, when he was happy to take a big payout?

Or the way he set up a charity and then used the bulk of the $$ raised for himself and his lobbyist buddies?

Yeah, that’s integrity alright.

JA on March 17, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Links, please.

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Nice article for St. Patrick’s Day !!!

TimLenox on March 17, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Well, Newt does have more Irish in him than English-born Patrick did.

itsnotaboutme on March 17, 2012 at 7:13 PM

I see, you are evidently not a fan of incendiary language. Let’s all love each other, give each other hugs and kisses, and maybe, just maybe, that will result in a better world!

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:32 PM

lovingmyUSA not a fan of incendiary language? LOLz!!! You must be a newbie…

…jeebus…

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Nope. Didn’t miss a thing. This is the most inane Gingrich post –possibly the most inane anything post — I have ever read.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Agreed. And yet, I am accused of dissing Tina.

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Laugh out loud!

itsnotaboutme on March 17, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Thanks!

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:17 PM

lovingmyUSA not a fan of incendiary language? LOLz!!! You must be a newbie…

…jeebus…

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:15 PM

No I’m not but we normally don’t intersect, this is an unusual time for me.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:19 PM

This is the most inane Gingrich post –possibly the most inane anything post — I have ever read.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM
Don’t let Dr. T see that…it’s out to lunch right now. It got all bent out of shape on the Obama Oil thread when someone said Tina was a lightweight, or sumptin/…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:41 PM

*ahem*

Dat was me….

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Links, please.

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:13 PM

I don’t know about the other issues, but the pretend house in Pennsylvania and fleecing the state’s taxpayers for his kids’ pretend school tuition is common knowledge. You should have no problem finding those links on your own, and they do point to a man with serious character issues who is mighty willing to enrich himself at the expense of middle class taxpayers.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 7:20 PM

When you can destroy a politician with ridicule, something is wrong with their fundamental appeal.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Why is it that Leftist politicians (take for example Bill Clinton and even the pre-Presidency Obama) “survive” serious and credible ridicule while conservatives like Palin are propagandized (by the MSM, whose B.S. you’ve obviously bought into) for minor mistakes as having been “destroyed”?

[Rhetorical question, having nothing to do with their "fundamental appeal" ... check your premises.]

ShainS on March 17, 2012 at 7:23 PM

2012 Republican Popular Vote

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Ah yes, another person who doesn’t know the difference between a plurality and a majority…

“Most voters” did not choose Romney. this is a true statement.

alwaysfiredup on March 17, 2012 at 7:23 PM

When you can destroy a politician with ridicule, something is wrong with their fundamental appeal.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Inanity revealed. There is something wrong with every candidate that can be exploited for laughs. No such thing as a perfect candidate unless you’e got the media in your pocket. No Republican will ever have that. Move along.

(Santorum just put himself out there as wanting to censor the internet. Yes, that’s ridiculous and an unforced error.)

alwaysfiredup on March 17, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Nope, it doesn’t work that way. If someone makes a claim of fact, that person needs to provide the proof.

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Why is it that Leftist politicians (take for example Bill Clinton and even the pre-Presidency Obama) “survive” serious and credible ridicule while conservatives like Palin are propagandized (by the MSM, whose B.S. you’ve obviously bought into) for minor mistakes as having been “destroyed”?

[Rhetorical question, having nothing to do with their "fundamental appeal" ... check your premises.]

ShainS on March 17, 2012 at 7:23 PM

The MSM will not even attempt to destroy leftists, but the fact of the matter is that good (meaning non-corrupt) Conservative politicians with fundamental appeal like Allen West or Gov. Walker will survive the most ardent ridicule.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Don’t let Dr. T see that…it’s out to lunch right now. It got all bent out of shape on the Obama Oil thread when someone said Tina was a lightweight, or sumptin/…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Quiet,you! I’m hoping for a Tesla free evening. That said
HANG IN THERE NEWT!

katy the mean old lady on March 17, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Danish on March 17, 2012 at 7:09 PM

*Sigh big enuff to blow the head off me beer…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 7:32 PM

If it’s not your feelings then you may want to check your math. Run the numbers for the anti-Newt, anti-Santorum, and anti-Paul vote. A person can view numbers through an emotional prism to fit whatever preconceptions s/he may hold. But, in the end, it is as I said; the numbers are not impacted at all.
whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Well of course the anti-anyone-else numbers are higher. All I’m saying is that the repeated rise of anti-Romneys is indicative of something.

Agreed. What I’m saying is that numbers can be interpreted subjectively, much like reading the entrails of doves for some deep meaning. You’ve done just that here:

He is the “presumptive nominee”, someone who by all rights should be running away with it and yet he is not. I think he is in real trouble.
Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:09 PM

It’s normal to have opinions on facts, figures and events that have occurred. But the old saying about “walking into a store with 5 dollars and an opinion you can buy —-” applies.

The only thing that can be objectively derived from what you’ve noted above is that more than one person is running for the office of POTUS.

However, you may want to revisit your conclusions. In looking at the polling chart for the last year, you see sudden rises and sudden falls for the not-Mitts along the way. On a chart it’s called “head and shoulders”. Now, if you follow the Mitt numbers throughout that same whole time period you’ll note there are minor (compared to others) up and downs, but the consistent trend is upward. That is more the type of thing that, to statisticians, would be indicative of of something.
Polling chart for past 12 months

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 7:32 PM

lovingmyUSA not a fan of incendiary language? LOLz!!! You must be a newbie…

…jeebus…

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:15 PM

No I’m not but we normally don’t intersect, this is an unusual time for me.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:19 PM

I blame the Irish coffee…I’ve had cups and cups of it…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Pretty neat, huh? After all the mistakes he’s made, the stressful life he’s lived, the political career he’s had, he’s able to say this.
I’m sorry, but this is what HotAir has become? We’re doing Deepak Chopra now? It’s “neat” that a lifelong, gasbag, sucking-at-the-teat-of-government-largesse-for-30-years, adulterous politician professes that he is “happy.” I’m looking for the parody in this post, but I am just not finding it. I’m having a God-awful feeling that this post is serious.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Tina is very young, so I’m willing to cut her a lot of slack, but I have to agree with you here. Is Mitt Romney, the guy who married his HS sweetheart, donated his entire inheritance and earned it back 100 fold and now has 17 grandchildren that he dotes on,not a “lover of life?” And how about Rick Santorum, who has suffered any number of personal and political tragedies, but seems pretty upbeat and joyful.

I have no problem with Newt being happy. But, hell, what is the big freaking deal?

Priscilla on March 17, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Nope, it doesn’t work that way. If someone makes a claim of fact, that person needs to provide the proof.

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 7:27 PM

So if someone makes a claim you had not heard about a candidate you might support, a claim that suggests he is likely quite unfit for high office, but they don’t provide you a link, you simply disregard it? Aren’t you ever left wondering? I ask because it has happened to me, usually with polls. One of the liberals here is always posting these “poll” results “showing” that huge majorities of voters support Obama, blah, blah, blah. I go looking for them. Can’t find them. Then ask for a link. He/she has never once responded with a link! But I still look on my own, too. I’m kind of curious that way.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 7:36 PM

katy the mean old lady on March 17, 2012 at 7:31 PM

*turns key on mouth and throws away…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 7:37 PM

*Sigh big enuff to blow the head off me beer…

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 7:32 PM

If only I could blow the beer out of your system…

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 7:38 PM

That is more the type of thing that, to statisticians, would be indicative of of something.
Polling chart for past 12 months

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 7:32 PM

It’s indicative of SOMETHING, and it could be grudging acceptance or great enthusiasm. My observation is that with all that AND AN ENORMOUS ADVERTISING ADVANTAGE Santorum would have beaten him in Michigan and Ohio were it not for a few self-inflicted wounds right before the elections, and did beat him in the South. My interpretation is that Romney is a very vulnerable candidate, and I think that Santorum can become very strong if accepted as a real possibility.

And now I have to go.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:41 PM

katy the mean old lady on March 17, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Especially since it annoys so many!! I heard someone wrote poetry to you. Sorry I missed it.

Cindy Munford on March 17, 2012 at 7:43 PM

If only I could blow the beer out of your system…

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Now why would you want to waste good beer..

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 7:43 PM

The only thing Romney ever produced was money for himself and a few friends.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on March 17, 2012 at 5:27 PM

I greatly admire Newt Gingrich’s intelligence. Gingrich, based upon what he has written in the past, and what he has said in speeches, clearly understands how financial capital works. That’s what made his “crony capitalist” attack on Romney seem deeply cynical to me and many others.

I expect conservative candidates to understand and defend the free enterprise system. At the bare minimum, they should not be making socialist attacks upon their own principles. “Nobody is perfect,” sadly, is the argument for Romney.

JHB on March 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 7:36 PM

It is the claimant’s place to prove their claim.

I’m sorry you don’t understand this. I think it is really quite simple…

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

It is the claimant’s place to prove their claim.

I’m sorry you don’t understand this. I think it is really quite simple…

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

It is the voter’s place to educate herself. Also quite simple. Behold the power of Google.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

JHB on March 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Do you admire those companies that take advantage of poor people with those paycheck loans and charge them outrageous interest and fees? I’m sure they are part of free enterprise, but that doesn’t make them pristine. I think there is a case to be made that companies that buy out failing companies, borrow money against them, pay themselves big bonuses out of the proceeds, fire a bunch of people, put their geniuses in to run them and end up bankrupt anyway are not well tought of by a lot of people even if they are part of free enterprise.

I find the fact that most of Romney’s campaign money came from big Wall Street companies troubling. Think he won’t owe them something?

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Pretty neat, huh? After all the mistakes he’s made, the stressful life he’s lived, the political career he’s had, he’s able to say this.

I’m sorry, but this is what HotAir has become? We’re doing Deepak Chopra now? It’s “neat” that a lifelong, gasbag, sucking-at-the-teat-of-government-largesse-for-30-years, adulterous politician professes that he is “happy.” I’m looking for the parody in this post, but I am just not finding it. I’m having a God-awful feeling that this post is serious.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Freakin’ A — This.

WTH?

SD Tom on March 17, 2012 at 8:20 PM

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

You can find all sides of every argument on the internet. Add to that that certain things are more important to some voters than others, who knows what the “truth” is?

Cindy Munford on March 17, 2012 at 8:22 PM

What’s next, a Hot Air post admiring the crease in Newt’s pants?

Facepalm.

IcedTea on March 17, 2012 at 8:24 PM

And I just thought the fat jabbering slob loved cheeseburgers..

TexasJew on March 17, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Newt can be a nasty SOB. Just what we need. Not another Bush or Obama who rubber stamped a Congress of their own party.

Nexialist on March 17, 2012 at 8:41 PM

I find the fact that most of Romney’s campaign money came from big Wall Street companies troubling. Think he won’t owe them something?
Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Someone is spouting Palinese. Do you really want to play this game? Santorum is simpatico with unions. “Think he won’t owe them something?”

What do you think Big Wall Street wants? Please provide a specific example of something concrete…

Thanks!

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM

I’m sorry, but this is what HotAir has become? We’re doing Deepak Chopra now? It’s “neat” that a lifelong, gasbag, sucking-at-the-teat-of-government-largesse-for-30-years, adulterous politician professes that he is “happy.” I’m looking for the parody in this post, but I am just not finding it. I’m having a God-awful feeling that this post is serious.
Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

Too much cynicism; everything doesn’t need to be hardball political fistfights 24/7. Tina’s choice of topic is fine, though I grant you she could have gone with a better example for the epitome of cheer and goodwill, lol. Had she shared just her own observations on the topic instead it would’ve been better – and made for more enjoyable reading.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 8:49 PM

It is the claimant’s place to prove their claim.

I’m sorry you don’t understand this. I think it is really quite simple…

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

It is the voter’s place to educate herself. Also quite simple. Behold the power of Google.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

You never would have made it in a debate club….

lovingmyUSA on March 17, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Nice that you love life, Newt. Kathy didn’t make a dent in the primary because it’s all Mitt-Santorum is just for language and sunbathing, and whoever is managing that campaign in Puerto Rico does not have the experience of handling something as significant as this.

After several days blogging on the PR race, I FINALLY came upon Newt’s official campaign website in PR. In the past hour! Since I am front and center and like the first 15 links in Google I am not gonna bother propping him up.

I need a damn stimulus!!—–> money, of course. It was so awkward grabbing news of those two everywhere but not from Kathy, or what Newt can bring to the table. The people don’t know. We know, of course-the frackin’ status bubble is not allowing them to see farther than that, imho.

At least that’s my guess; I know that PR is struggling-at the same time, they want to pitch in this way. Newt worked with the Don Young bill (AK) to fix the Hatfields Vs. The McCoys battle and Newt can pull it off.

He just has to pull his head out of Louisiana.

ProudPalinFan on March 17, 2012 at 8:55 PM

• . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .“~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./…..\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>–

ProudPalinFan on March 17, 2012 at 8:56 PM

I’m sorry, but this is what HotAir has become? We’re doing Deepak Chopra now? It’s “neat” that a lifelong, gasbag, sucking-at-the-teat-of-government-largesse-for-30-years, adulterous politician professes that he is “happy.” I’m looking for the parody in this post, but I am just not finding it. I’m having a God-awful feeling that this post is serious.
Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

You have no sense of history. Gingrich brought Republicans out of permanent minority status and brought sanity back to government. And you want to gamble on Rick Romney?

Nexialist on March 17, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Someone is spouting Palinese. Do you really want to play this game? Santorum is simpatico with unions. “Think he won’t owe them something?”

What do you think Big Wall Street wants? Please provide a specific example of something concrete…

Thanks!

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Did you listen to Palin’s speech in Iowa, or do you just automatically dismiss anything she says out of hand? I’m not playing a game, and I’m not a Santorum supporter. I support Newt, and since everyone seems to hate him, he won’t owe anyone anything. One specific thing I can think of is that law, I can’t remember the name of, that allowed financial companies to branch out into formerly unallowed activities, like banks selling insurance and stocks and the like. There has been talk of changing it back. I don’t think they would like that, and I think they would pressure Romney about it. You’re welcome!

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 9:00 PM

You have no sense of history. Gingrich brought Republicans out of permanent minority status and brought sanity back to government. And you want to gamble on Rick Romney?

Nexialist on March 17, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Yeah, cuz Newt sit-on-the-couch-with-Pelosi Gingrich is not a gamble…

IcedTea on March 17, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Look at what they do, not what they say.

Nexialist on March 17, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Newt can be a nasty SOB. Just what we need. Not another Bush or Obama who rubber stamped a Congress of their own party.

Nexialist on March 17, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Sometimes it takes one to beat one! He is the one I think could do it.

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 9:07 PM

It is the claimant’s place to prove their claim.

I’m sorry you don’t understand this. I think it is really quite simple…

ladyingray on March 17, 2012 at 8:05 PM

It is the voter’s place to educate herself. Also quite simple. Behold the power of Google.

Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 8:13 PM

So I can say that you kick puppies and when you demand I prove my assertion I can tell you to google it?

Yeah, works for me.

kim roy on March 17, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Someone is spouting Palinese. Do you really want to play this game? Santorum is simpatico with unions. “Think he won’t owe them something?”

What do you think Big Wall Street wants? Please provide a specific example of something concrete…

Thanks!

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Did you listen to Palin’s speech in Iowa, or do you just automatically dismiss anything she says out of hand? I’m not playing a game, and I’m not a Santorum supporter. I support Newt, and since everyone seems to hate him, he won’t owe anyone anything. One specific thing I can think of is that law, I can’t remember the name of, that allowed financial companies to branch out into formerly unallowed activities, like banks selling insurance and stocks and the like. There has been talk of changing it back. I don’t think they would like that, and I think they would pressure Romney about it. You’re welcome!

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 9:00 PM

No, no, no. You are supposed to suggest they google it and chide them for not educating themselves.

kim roy on March 17, 2012 at 9:30 PM

No, no, no. You are supposed to suggest they google it and chide them for not educating themselves.

kim roy on March 17, 2012 at 9:30 PM

LOL- You probably noted that I didn’t bother to look up the name of the law I cited. I leave that to anyone who cares that much. If I am not getting paid, I am not willing to do that much work!

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 9:39 PM

My interpretation is that Romney is a very vulnerable candidate, and I think that Santorum can become very strong if accepted as a real possibility.

And now I have to go.

Igor R. on March 17, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Eh, well, thinks look kinda static but anything is possible.

Enjoy your evening.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 10:08 PM

You probably noted that I didn’t bother to look up the name of the law I cited. I leave that to anyone who cares that much. If I am not getting paid, I am not willing to do that much work!
Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 9:39 PM

As a general rule, if a person doesn’t care enough to make their own point other people are likely to care even less about making it for him.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 9:39 PM

As a general rule, if a person doesn’t care enough to make their own point other people are likely to care even less about making it for him.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Just a general observation there. Not directed at you, lol.

whatcat on March 17, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Did you listen to Palin’s speech in Iowa, or do you just automatically dismiss anything she says out of hand? I’m not playing a game, and I’m not a Santorum supporter. I support Newt, and since everyone seems to hate him, he won’t owe anyone anything. One specific thing I can think of is that law, I can’t remember the name of, that allowed financial companies to branch out into formerly unallowed activities, like banks selling insurance and stocks and the like. There has been talk of changing it back. I don’t think they would like that, and I think they would pressure Romney about it. You’re welcome!
Night Owl on March 17, 2012 at 9:00 PM

You have no idea how funny that question is. Yes, indeed, I did listen very, very closely to her speech in Iowa. It was the first clue she can’t be trusted. Actually, make that the second clue. The first was her coy games last summer with her will-she-won’t-she string along her supporters tease. Now we have all sorts of clues and dots to connect. So yeah, I pay very close attention.

As for banks, Dodd-Franks (for example) is a disaster, so it would be a great idea to overturn it and I don’t blame them in the least for supporting Romney over Obama. But a President cannot work without Congress.

No, no, no. You are supposed to suggest they google it and chide them for not educating themselves.

kim roy on March 17, 2012 at 9:30 PM

You’re making a fool of yourself. Feel free!

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 11:35 PM

No, no, no. You are supposed to suggest they google it and chide them for not educating themselves.

kim roy on March 17, 2012 at 9:30 PM

You’re making a fool of yourself. Feel free!

Buy Danish on March 17, 2012 at 11:35 PM

You agree with the OP who blew crap out of his butt and when asked for a link told the questioner to “educate themselves” and “google it”?

Glad to see you confirm your interest in getting the facts.

Or did you not bother to read the thread and really have no idea what you are responding to?

kim roy on March 18, 2012 at 1:09 AM

kim roy on March 18, 2012 at 1:09 AM

Night Owl was responding to a comment I made. You responded to her comment. Voila! How crazy of me to assume your comment was directed to me, not someone who said to use Google. FTR, that’s what DDRNTN did yesterday so, ha ha.

Buy Danish on March 18, 2012 at 8:35 AM

I’m sorry, but this is what HotAir has become? We’re doing Deepak Chopra now? It’s “neat” that a lifelong, gasbag, sucking-at-the-teat-of-government-largesse-for-30-years, adulterous politician professes that he is “happy.” I’m looking for the parody in this post, but I am just not finding it. I’m having a God-awful feeling that this post is serious.
Rational Thought on March 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM

You have no sense of history.

Nexialist on March 17, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Rational just demonstrated a grasp of Newt’s history. Except that there’s a few more details of Newt’s baggage he could’ve added:

Gingrich is the only Speaker of the House ever to have been disciplined for an ethics violation.

Gingrich once announced to reporters that a personal grudge against President Clinton affected his duties as Speaker.

Gingrich wrote a doctoral dissertation criticizing Christian missionaries who discouraged adultery in the Congo. He wrote that adultery was “the essence of tribal stability.”

Gingrich on Reagan: “Measured against the scale and momentum of the Soviet empire’s challenge, the Reagan administration has failed, is failing and without a dramatic, fundamental change in strategy will continue to fail…The burden of the failure frankly must be placed first upon President Reagan…Beyond the obvious indicators of decay, the fact is that President Reagan has lost control of the national agenda.”

Gingrich dumped his first wife because he fell for another woman, & after marrying her, he dumped her when he fell for yet another.

Gingrich accepted $1,500,000 in “consulting” fees from the corrupto-crats at Freddie Mac, which probably were actually lobbying fees, which is probably illegal.

Gingrich bragged about being a moderate with this comment: “There is a new synthesis evolving with the classic moderate wing of the party, where as a former Rockefeller state chairman, I’ve spent most of my life.”

Gingrich starred in a 2007 global warming commercial with Nancy Pelosi that was sponsored by Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection. He has since has flip-flopped spectacularly on global warming.

Gingrich was paid $312,000 by ethanol interests, and then said ethanol is good for national security and for the economy.

Gingrich has consistently supported the type of individual mandates for health insurance that conservatives are trying to overturn through court challenges to Obamacare.

Gingrich went on NBC’s “Meet the Press” and called Paul Ryan’s Medicare plan “radical” and “right-wing social engineering.”

Gingrich said of the Medicare prescription drug plan that was the largest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society, “Every conservative member of Congress should vote for this Medicare bill. Obstructionist conservatives can always find reasons to vote no.”

Gingrich attacked Steve Largent, Tom Coburn and other conservatives as “the Perfectionist Caucus,” while giving his last speech as speaker in support of Dick Gephardt and Dave Obey’s colossal Omnibus Bill of 1998.

itsnotaboutme on March 18, 2012 at 9:40 AM

I greatly admire Newt Gingrich’s intelligence. Gingrich, based upon what he has written in the past, and what he has said in speeches, clearly understands how financial capital works. That’s what made his “crony capitalist” attack on Romney seem deeply cynical to me and many others.

I expect conservative candidates to understand and defend the free enterprise system. At the bare minimum, they should not be making socialist attacks upon their own principles. “Nobody is perfect,” sadly, is the argument for Romney.

JHB on March 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Newt was attacked for going after Bain because all capitalism is deemed as worthy, whether there is corruption involved or not. Bain is considered untouchable because of the sponsorship over many conservative entities. They made more from destroying ampad than they did from staples.

Yes, there is a difference between corporatism and free market capitalism.

Romney is a corporatist; he obviously doesn’t have a clue about the free market system ie his minimum wage and RomneyCare debacles.

IndeCon on March 18, 2012 at 10:56 AM

itsnotaboutme on March 18, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Gingrich is toast, but he’s still the best candidate, other than Ron Paul.

Nexialist on March 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM

We were laughing over dinner last night about the irony of Newt’s first wish to be a zookeeper. If we can get him into the WH, that wish will be fulfilled. America is definitely qualifying as a ZOO these days.
(although I think animals are a lot more civilized)

GO NEWT!

sandollar_sa on March 19, 2012 at 5:03 PM

itsnotaboutme on March 18, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Y’All need to get some new talking points. These objects aren’t so “shiny” anymore.
Not to mention that every one of them has been confabulated into lies.

sandollar_sa on March 19, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Comment pages: 1 2